Microvitum

Are there entities smaller than atoms or electrons or protons? Are there objects subtler than ectoplasm?

Answers to these questions articulated by P.R. Sarkar, the Renaissance Man profounder and spiritual master of Ananda Marga open new insights and offer penetrating "kaya mo ba ito?" challenge for further research work to present day scientists and scholars.

In a book published by Ananda Marga Publications, P.R.Sarkar ( also known as Shrii Shrii Anandamurti) gave a discourse on MICROVITUM- THE MYSTERIOUS EMANATION OF COSMIC FACTOR.

The discourse on MICROVITUM explains that there are entities which comes in the realm of both physicality and psychic expressions which are smaller or subtler than atoms or electrons or protons, and in the psychic realm they may be subtler than ectoplasm. For such objects or for such entities P.R. Sarkar use the term microvitum.

This microvita are not of protoplasmic order and as such they have got little to do with with carbon-molecules or carbon atoms, which are treated as the initial points or initial stage of life in this universe.

So far as the physicality is concerned, the position of these microvita is just between ectoplasm and electron. But they are neither ectoplasm nor electron. According to P.R. Sarkar, it is a human wont that whatever we know regaradding any subject or any object, when we know that it exists but its characteristics or other particulars are not known to us, we say it is "mysterious". So regarding this microvita, we may say they are mysterious.

That is why I used the term "Microvitum, the mysterious emanation of Cosmic Factor." They are not of protoplasmic order and hence the question of their protozoic structure or metazoic structure does not arise. They are something mysterious.

Microvita classified - P.R. Sarkar explains the three categories of microvita which are :

A) Those coming within the scope of microscope.

B) Those not coming within the scope of perception but coming within the scope of perception as a result of their actional vibrations.

C) Those not coming within the scope of common perception but coming within the scope of a special type of perception which is actually the reflection of conception within the periphery of perception. And such perception , that special type of perception, may be felt or realized by persons having highly developed minds, having spiritually oriented minds.

Regarding these microvita of cruder order which may come within the scope of microscope, people give them the name 'virus'. They say ,"This disease is of virus origin." But virus is a vague term. The better term will be mcrovitum, and not virus.

Mobility of Microvita- According to P.R. Sarkar, microvita move througout the entire universe, from one celestial body to another. They move everywhere crossing the boundaries of nebulae, piercing through milkyways, galaxies, stars, satelites, planets and meteors. Like other psychic and psycho-phyusical beings, they have also got basic characteristics- such as existing , dying and multiplying. They move unbarred, without caring for the atmospheric condition or barometric reading.

How do they move?
( to be continued )

TANTRIC MEDITATION AND VEGETARIANISM

In the discussion on meditation, a healthy body is a must.

To keep a healthy body proper food and asanas are obviously twin subjects that cannot be ignored. Practitioners of tantra yoga adheres to vegetarianism as a key ingredient in maintaining a healthy lifestyle. Below are some of many arguments to support vegetarianism :

1) Is it natural for humans to eat meat?

Human beings are natural non-carnivores. His or her digestive system evolving for over a million years living on fruits, nuts, grains and vegetables manifest a slow digestion of vegetables and fruits shown by having bowels 12 times the length of the human body.

Human digestive system, the structures of jaw and tooth and bodily function are distinct from that of carnivorous animals.

The bowels of carnivores is shorter, only 3 times the length of the body, for faster expulsion of putrerfactive bacteria from decomposing flesh; stomachs with ten times as much hydrochloric acid as non -carnivorous animals, to digest fibrous tissues and bones.

2) What are the dangers in eating meat?

Before and during the agony of being slaughtered the biochemistry of the terrified animal undergoes changes as it struggles and hang on fighting for dear life.

Toxic by-products and large quantities of adrenalin are forced throughout the body, thus poisoning the entire carcass, leaving toxic wastes in the blood and tissues.

The fats of animal flesh such as cholesterol line the walls of blood vessels of the non-vegetarian, and as the meat-eater gets older, the openings of his vessels get smaller and smaller.

Pressure on the heart increases often resulting to heart failure, high blood pressure and stroke.

It is interesting to note that these diseases are not prevalent in countries where meat consumption is low. Among the most notorious wastes that meat-eaters store in the body are urea and uric acid. Beefsteak contains 14 grams of uric acid per pound.

An American doctor analyzed the urine of meat-eaters and vegetarians and found that the kidneys of meat-eaters have to do three times the amount of work to eliminate poisonous nitrogen compounds in meat than do the kidneys of vegetarians. When people are young, they are usually able to bear this extra burden so that no evidence of injury or disease appears; but as the kidneys age and become worn out prematurely, they become less efficient resulting to kidney disease.

When kidneys can no longer handle the excessively heavy load of a meat-eating diet, the unexcreted uric acid is deposited throughout the body. There it is abssorbed by the muscles like a sponge soaking up water and later it can harden and form crystals.

When this happens in the joints, the painful condition of gout, arthritis, rheumatism result; when the uric acid collects in the nerves, neurithis and sciatica occur. Many doctors are advising patients suffering from these diseases to stop eating meat completely or reduce intake drastically.

3) Is it right to kill animals?

P.R. Sarkar, the Renaissance Man and a profounder of vegetarianism, teaches:

"As far as possible articles of food are to be selected from amongst the sets of items where the development of consciousness is comparatively littlle, i.e. if vegetables are available, animals should not be slaughtered. Secondly, under any circumstances before killing any animals having developed or undeveloped consciousness, it is to be considered whether it is possible to live in a healthy body without taking such lives."

4) The politics of hunger.

Meat is the most uneconomical and inefficient food we can eat.

In order to produce meat vast track of land is used to grow cattle feed. The cattle consumes about ten times more protein and calories than they return in form of their meat. In other words, 90% "goes down the drain."

Adding the expenses of cattle feed to the other costs of cattle raising, the cost of meat protein comes to about twenty times the cost of plant protein.

Instead of wasting land for meat production these land could be used far more productively if utilized to plant grains, beans and legumes for direct human consumption. The following data taken from "What's Wrong with Eating Meat, " an Ananda Marga Publication, lists more economic reasons why vegetarianism is gaining ground as an alternative lifestyle :

- If we conserve our grain supply and gave it to the poor and malnourished, instead of to the cattle, we could easily feed all of the chronically underfed people of the world.

- If we ate half as much meat, we could relese enough food to feed the entire " developing world."

- Recent studies by nutritionists have shown that reducing meat production by just 10 % would relese enough grain to feed 60 million people.

- The shocking and tragic truth is that 80-90% of all grain grown in America is used to feed meat animals.

- Twenty years ago, the average American ate 50 pounds of meat annually. Because of America's "fixation on meat" , most eat twice the daily recommended protein allowance. Learning the real facts behind the "food shortage" is fundamental to an understanding of how we can properly utilize the world's resources.

Clearly the decision whether to eat meat or not is a personal one but based on the arguments against it; it is rather difficult to find a case in favor of meat-eating. (Unless of course, where it is absolutely necessary for physical reasons.)